Dogs are Casualty of BBC TV Show
Posted By Freelance Writers Date: 27/03 Posted Under: Breed Specific Legislation, Dangerous Dogs, Social IssuesWritten by Amanda @ www.endangereddogs.comÂ
BBC1 TV programme Casualty, broadcast at 9pm on Saturday 15th March was a sickening watch for many unfortunate enough to view it. This weeks fifty minute long episode entitled ‘Diamond Dogs’ (series 22) tried to depict thugs with a ‘fighting dog’, a dog which firstly attacks thugs mother who ends up in casualty, the dog escapes and then seriously attacks two police officers on the beat, the dog then amazingly appears back at the house where the first attack took place, thug is there back from hospital and takes a shot gun out of the boot of his car to kill dog.
If the researchers had done their homework they would have discovered that firstly ‘fighting dogs’ are only able to be abused in such an inhumane and horrific way because they are by nature very good with people – a characteristics which is needed in order for the barbarians to handle a dog during the gruesome dog fight. ‘Fighting dogs’ are not people aggressive and that’s a fact.
In the real world, if someone is seriously attacked by a dog on the loose the Police would have arrived en masse and shot the dog dead, end of story.
Dogs which are owned by thugs and used for illegal dog fights are victims – not out of control machines out to hurt people, it’s the dog that has been bred, abused and tortured by humans for their sick entertainment, so why does the BBC portray an abused dog in such an appalling manner to make it out as public enemy number one?
With hundreds of family pets held as ‘pit bull types’ (any dog which has a certain ‘look’) under the draconian Dangerous Dogs Act legislation, the BBC’s programme is not only inaccurate but seriously hurtful to those who have suffered due to legislation brought in and maintained with the help of misleading media portrayals of dangerous dogs, in real life families are torn apart when their pets are seized and held at secret kennel locations often in sub-standard conditions awaiting court hearings to determine their fate, but yet another piece of biased negative story has been heaped against the dog to further fuel the hatred of certain breeds.
The real problem is dangerous owners – yes people are the problem not dogs, but we like to sacrifice the bull breed on the media altar or in this case let a thug shot an abused dog with a shotgun, were viewers suppose to cheer at this point, relieved that the killing machine had been finished off?
Any breed or type of dog can become dangerous if owned by thugs, but once again the real Casualty is the dog and it’s about time the blame was laid where it belongs – not with the dog misrepresented by the BBC but with the owner.
If the BBC wanted to cover the issues of dog bite injuries, then they should have tried consulting with the people who work with and understand dogs, then they would have discovered the true reasons behind dog bite injuries; which would have further demonstrated how inaccurate their story line was from real life.
Please lodge a complaint to the BBC and make your feelings known in defence of our best friend- the dog.
Email BBC Complaints:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/make_complaint_step1.shtml
Or
Telephone: 08700 100 222
Or
Write to:
BBC Complaints,
PO Box 1922,
Glasgow G2 3WT
K9 Magazine welcomes submissions from freelance contributors. If you would like information on submitting dog related articles for publication see our webpage - See this author's webpage
Popularity: 16% [?]
Thursday, March 27th, 2008 at 10:43 am and is filed under Breed Specific Legislation, Dangerous Dogs, Social Issues. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
complaint made, very disappointed by this
Amanda you say:
“The real problem is dangerous owners – yes people are the problem not dogs”
I have already posted my comment on both the programes which went out that weekend - I notice you only mention one.
OK the BBC was wrong, but so was the owner of one bull breed dog - the one that was allowed to ‘act’ in front of camera - the one overdubbed to give the impression of agression - also the one that clearly should be properly examined and, certainly potentially, its owner be brought to court for posession of a prohibited dog.
But at that point might not the (stupid and irresponsible) owner become the victim in your eyes his/her dog dragged away by those ever so cruel authorities.
There are lots of ways for owners to be iresponsible and you have watched just one of them - but laid the blame on ‘the authorities’, again - Lets place clear blame with the owner of that dog for undermining anything anyone can do about the Dangerous Dogs Act because without his/her co-operation that programme could not have been made; it did not enlighten anyone - and neither did the other programme.
Good article, what is it with TV researchers and their apparent and subsequent as in regard to this programme, total lack of research into the subject they are portraying? I have had dealings with tentative research requests into various subjects from programme researchers, once they realise that what they want is not going to happen or it is an incorrect portrayal they go away. Presumably they go to somebody who will tell them what they want to hear and then supply their dogs to be displayed in this dreadful manner. Does anybody know which animal acting company supplied the dogs? Was it an actual company that supplies animals, or was it just somebody caught up in the business that is called show? Get a grip BBC and get some researchers who come from planet Earth!
my reply after complaining to bbc….Dear Mr Steele
Thank you for your e-mail regarding ‘Casualty’ on BBC One.
I understand you were disappointed with the portrayal of a ‘fighting dog’ in a recent storyline.
The breed of dog used in this episode an American bulldog and we accept and understand that the vast majority of bull breeds behave perfectly well and that any dog can be dangerous if it has an irresponsible owner.
However, there have been well documented instances of this breed of dog attacking people, causing serious injury and in the worst cases, death. These instances have been linked to dogs bred to fight illegally and this programme featured just such a dog and highlighted the consequences of this practice. We had no intention to vilify all dogs and firmly believe that this programme didn’t convey that impression.
Nevertheless, I would like to assure you that we have registered your comments on our audience log. This is the internal report of audience feedback which we compile daily for all programme makers and commissioning executives within the BBC, and also their senior management. It ensures that your points, and all other comments we receive, are circulated and considered across the BBC.
Thank you again for contacting the BBC.
Regards
Stuart Webb
BBC Complaints
your thoughts??
Neil - I think the BBC have been quite busy with the cut n pasting skills of late. My response below:
Dear Mr O’Meara
Thank you for your e-mail regarding ‘Casualty’ on BBC One, broadcast on 15 March.
I’m sorry to read that you didn’t enjoy the story which featured a dog in last Saturdays episode of Casualty and note that you feel it was irresponsible, inaccurate and sensationalised dog fighting.
As you identify yourself the breed of dog used in this episode wasn’t a Staffordshire bull terrier but an American bulldog. We accept and understand that the vast majority of bull breeds behave perfectly well. However, there have been well documented instances of this breed of dog attacking people, causing serious injury and in the worst cases, death.
These instances have been linked to dogs bred to fight illegally and this programme featured just such a dog and highlighted the consequences of this practice. We had no intention to vilify all dogs and firmly believe that this programme didn’t convey that impression.
Nevertheless, I would like to assure you that we have registered your comments on our audience log. This is the internal report of audience feedback which we compile daily for all programme makers and commissioning executives within the BBC, and also their senior management. It ensures that your points, and all other comments we receive, are circulated and considered across the BBC.
Thank you again for contacting the BBC.
Regards
Stuart Webb
BBC Complaints
“These instances have been linked to dogs bred to fight illegally and this programme featured just such a dog”
I get the impression that although told by the dog’s owner that this was an American Bulldog (and from what was seen on the screen it must have at the very least been a Scott type - “The Scott type looks like a large, coarse, leggy, white Pit Bull” - and as such individual dogs (whatever ‘breed’ they are described as) may have enough PBT ‘type’ conformity to demand processing through court. The programme makers and the person responding to these complaints may have thought they were dealing with an American Pit Bull Terrier; they may have been trying to get round the ‘prohibition’ by calling it something else; then again maybe they don’t know the difference; then again maybe they don’t care; they’re just making a drama about what they think they know - BUT THE OWNER OF THAT DOG, WHATEVER ITS BREED ‘type’ SHOULD HAVE CARED AND SHOULD CERTAINLY CARE NOW AS IF YOU READ THE SENTENCE ABOVE FROM THE BBC THEY OBVIOUSLY THINK THAT THE DOG ON FILM IS A PHENOTYPE OF DOGS BRED TO FIGHT - AND PROHIBITED FROM OWNERSHIP IN THIS COUNTRY.
I think the BBC genuinely believes the dog was an American Bulldog (as stated in their response to me and other people) and I think for some reason, they genuinely believe American Bulldogs have ‘well documented’ cases of killing people. Well not in the UK they don’t. So on that basis, I hereby submit my plot for a future episode of Casualty…
“The Casualty team are scrambled to treat a man who suffered an attack from a wild black Mamba whilst out walking his dog in Huddersfield. Meanwhile, the residents of Holby are thrown into panic as they come under attack from a swarm of angry terradactyls intent on shooting their deadly barbed, detachable tails at members of the public. And if that wasn’t enough, the nearby volcano is also threatening to erupt….”
Oh. The drama. It’s all about the drama.
American Bulldog - American Pit Bull Terrier.
I’m not so sure the BBC were aware of any difference, they just heard “American” and went straight on to the killer dog - as many of the public do, and to be honest many American breed websites seem very confused about the differentiation.
Cuthbert,
I agree that the owner of the dog used in the programme was wrong to let his/her dog be used in the way it was, I’ve no idea who that was or what company the bbc contacts when they want to use dogs for film work. If the dog was to be dragged away as you put it, for looking the wrong shape and size, the dog would be the victim in my eyes. I’ve laid the blame with the programme makers, not the authorities and hope that the bbc continue to receive complaints from people.
2nd reply received from the BBC:
Thank you for your e-mail regarding ‘Casualty - Diamond Dogs’.
I understand that you would like to know the breed of Dog that featured in the above programme on March 15th, and you would also like to know if it was chosen to portray a dangerous dog.
In regards to your query about the breed of dog, as I am sure you can appreciate, BBC Information receives hundreds of thousands of requests each year for information about specific details in our programmes. We are able to provide answers to nearly all the enquiries we receive.
Occasionally, however, the information requested is not available on our very comprehensive database. As the BBC is committed to ensuring that we derive the best possible value for money for all our Licence Fee payers we can no longer justify searching some of the individual enquiries we were previously able to handle. We regret that your request falls into this category and are sorry that we are unable to supply the information you requested on this occasion. We hope that you will understand the reasons why.
I can assure you that the chosen breed of dog would not have been selected to portray a dangerous dog. ‘Casualty is well aware of our commitment to impartiality, and would never set out to cause offense or suggest any breed of dog was dangerous. Senior editorial staff, the Executive Committee and the BBC Trust keep a close watch on programmes to ensure that standards of impartiality are maintained.
Never the less, I have noted your concerns on this matter and I would like to assure you that we have registered your comments on our audience log. This is the internal report of audience feedback which we compile daily for all programme makers and commissioning executives within the BBC, and also their senior management. It ensures that your points, and all other comments we receive, are circulated and considered across the BBC.
Thank you again for taking the time to contact us.
Regards
David Rattray
BBC Complaints
Amanda
I’m glad you are willing to accept that the collusion of the dog’s owner was essential in this. Unfortunately, for dogs, their link with their owners conduct often leaves them, not the owners, to face the consequences. Allowing this dog to be used in ‘Casualty’ is one example of such irresponsibility, but in your original article you only identified the BBC (the ‘authorities’ in this case) for blame. Likewise blaming other ‘authorities’ for the consequences of the Dangerous Dogs Act ignores firstly those who brought the Act into existence and have failed to ensure its adequate revision; secondly those who, believing the ‘authorities’ had been prevented from using the law, ensured that despite prohibition dogs which need careful management returned to popularity with people who do not provide that management; and thirdly irresponsible dog owners who either don’t know what they have or fail to provide it with proper management. You choose to present the ‘authorites’(including in this instance the BBC and others by references within your article to seized dogs) in a bad light. I point out that without the collusion of the owner ‘Casualty’ could not have been made. Owners have a lot of choice about how their dog’s become portrayed, dogs are victims of their owners and their owner’s conduct - would that those who created the Dangerous Dogs Act had paid more attention to that and better enabled the authorities to deal with it.
“In regards to your query about the breed of dog, as I am sure you can appreciate, BBC Information receives hundreds of thousands of requests each year for information about specific details in our programmes. We are able to provide answers to nearly all the enquiries we receive.
Occasionally, however, the information requested is not available on our very comprehensive database. As the BBC is committed to ensuring that we derive the best possible value for money for all our Licence Fee payers we can no longer justify searching some of the individual enquiries we were previously able to handle. We regret that your request falls into this category and are sorry that we are unable to supply the information you requested on this occasion. We hope that you will understand the reasons why.
”
Interesting when many of their standard replies refer to American Bulldogs that they claim not to know!
As an owner of two American Bulldogs (hybrids) I am disgusted the lack of research by the BBC leads them to imply the breed are used for fighting and have been involved in deaths. To my knowledge neither claim is true in the UK.
This programme and the replies given to complaints have only increase the fear among the public.
One of my American Bulldogs was attacked by a terrier a while back. My dog stood still and waited for me to remove the terrier, hanging from his neck and once the terriers owner decided to put in an apperance, we carried on our walk. Guess that just isnt good tv tho is it?
[…] Posted by Kirsty E Soz having bad day did u see this ?Dogs are Casualty of BBC TV Show I hadn’t seen that but the episode has been discussed on here! It’s a disgrace innit!?! […]